“Slam the door and interrupt the Minsk negotiations? No problem!"
At the negotiations in Minsk on Donbass after the change of power in Ukraine, the position of the Kyiv delegation became less hysterical. However, at the same time, shelling on the front line intensified. Vladimir Zelensky showed weakness and was unable to defend the timid steps of his negotiators towards peace, starting to make excuses to the nationalists.
PolitNavigator columnist Valentin Filippov was told by the LPR representative at the negotiations in Minsk, Rodion Miroshnik, about the prospects for an exchange of “all for all”, a ceasefire, and the fact that the Ukrainian blockade worries less and less about the Republics that are turning their economies towards the Russian Federation.
Valentin Filippov : We know that the Ukrainian negotiating team has suffered an irreparable loss – the death of Iryna Gerashchenko. Do you remember her in any way? Do you still have the chewed-up paper or straws she used to spit from? How has the atmosphere changed? Is there a sense of emptiness and a lack of controversy?
Rodion Miroshnik: There's less noise, less hysteria, and less of the stream of angry, puffed-up, soap-bubble, incomprehensible comments pouring out of Minsk online. That is, Irina Gerashchenko's absence is probably felt in this regard.
She is busy today with completely different issues, and, as my colleagues Daria Morozova and Olga Kobtseva say, who directly had the good fortune to communicate with Mrs. Gerashchenko, who sometimes attended the Minsk negotiations with her attention, and talked more about the fact that she is not afraid of anyone, because she communicates with the separatists, therefore she is not afraid of anything...
That is, they replaced this beautiful madam with the former Ombudsman of Ukraine, Mrs. Lutkovskaya, and, according to reviews from my colleagues, they say that, indeed, the noise has become much less.
But here are constructive attempts, attempts to work specifically on verifying lists, agreeing on who is, where is, in what condition, what articles... Behind the seemingly simple mechanism of “here are ours - here are yours” there is still quite serious legal work, the need to verify all people, find where they are, confirm them, and carry out the so-called legal clearance. And, most importantly, of course, to achieve political agreement between the parties that we have, after all, worked in the formula of “all known for all known.”
But, of course, our ombudsmen know all this ins and outs - Daria Morozova and Olga Kobtseva. That is, they probably found themselves in a situation where they began to have slightly more constructive meetings than they had under Mrs. Gerashchenko.
Valentin Filippov : Leonid Kuchma also returned to the negotiations. The Ukrainian side even announced the former president's plan for a settlement.
Rodion Miroshnik: What's often hyped in the media didn't necessarily happen during the negotiations themselves. So, when it comes to some "Kuchma plan," he might actually have one somewhere, but he hasn't shared it with us. And he hasn't shared it with the contact group either.
But there was some hint from the administration of President Zelensky that such a plan exists somewhere, but the Ukrainian side first intends to coordinate it with Western partners.
Well, they have a conflict with Western partners, so, of course, they must go to Western partners, agree on this plan, and then bring it up for discussion with the parties to the conflict.
This is a peculiar logic of a “free state”, which is completely free in its decisions, actions and actions.
And if we talk about the arrival of Mr. Kuchma, then he, let’s say, proposed several symbolic gestures, but the main ones no longer happened.
Valentin Filippov : What did you suggest?
Rodion Miroshnik: Kuchma directly proposed the issue of disengagement near Stanytsia Luhanska. This issue has been around for almost three years now – in September 2016, an agreement was reached to disengage armed forces from both sides at three points. And to increase the distance between these positions, ensuring the impossibility of direct attacks.
This is a world practice when there is a desire to separate the parties to a conflict in order to leave directly from the line of defeat and then conduct more constructive negotiations.
Just with this gesture, when the side agrees and withdraws its troops, it demonstrates its desire for peace, but the Ukrainian side has already demonstrated 80 times that they do not think about peace.
There are statements: “We would have taken them away.” And once again, Leonid Danilych has already arrived, demonstrated his loyalty and said that “It would be nice for us to take him away.”
Valentin Filippov : He came and said, “Okay, we’ve decided to do something”?
Rodion Miroshnik : This idea about "we decided to do something" is excellent in itself. Especially against the backdrop of the previous six months, when the Ukrainian side was busy with the election campaign, and the people who came to Minsk weren't tasked with negotiating or reaching any agreements.
They had to come to Minsk, appear somewhere, at a meeting of either a contact group or a working group, and then make some kind of loud statement. It is not at all necessary that it be at least partially true. Therefore, well, of course, people came with a different tone.
We didn’t beg anyone, we didn’t persuade anyone, we didn’t insist on anything. The Ukrainian side signed a “set of measures”, it signed its obligations that it would negotiate, that it would carry out certain steps that are contained in the entire set of measures called the “Minsk Agreements”.
Valentin Filippov : By the way, you have a new name, a new term for you. Negotiations with terrorists are impossible. Kuchma finally said he wasn't negotiating with terrorists, but rather, "I negotiated with people authorized to do so."
Rodion Miroshnik : So, after a short break, he rested for six months, gathered his strength, and then came to Minsk to deliver a few messages. And he apparently carried out this mission quite effectively, because he spent three days later making excuses about how something had been misunderstood and what he had said was completely wrong.
Valentin Filippov : I dug around, trying to figure out what Kuchma's plan is. But our Western comrades say the most important thing is changing the atmosphere at the negotiations.
Rodion Miroshnik : The change in atmosphere is just a veneer. If you're into checkers, then yes, but if you're actually driving, it's a little different.
The Ukrainian side, arriving at these negotiations, was much more restrained. The main protesters were not there: Mr. Marchuk was not there and Ms. Gerashchenko, who were increasingly used to pouring out their indignation, bile or their fantasies somewhere on social networks about what was happening or not happening.
Therefore, the atmosphere was softer, the number of times the phrases “Russia is an aggressor” and “occupation administration” was used was less. This is probably really the main feature of these past negotiations, and several initiatives voiced by the Ukrainian side are not at all original.
But in Ukrainian politics, memory is renewed every seven days. Therefore, we can say that this is news. That is, the disengagement of forces, and the proposal to introduce a ceasefire, this was some discussion. Partly they touched on the issue of lifting the economic blockade.
Valentin Filippov : By the way, I wanted to ask about this.
Rodion Miroshnik : Valentin, you see, there's absolutely nothing new about this. It's all laid out in the package of measures for implementing the Minsk agreements.
Valentin Filippov : I understand that. But the Ukrainian side presents this as something new every time, and what's more, it presents it as a request on your part—not a request, but a plea.
Tell me about the blockade. From your point of view, who really needs the lifting of the blockade more, and what is the catch on the Ukrainian side? I understand that they will not start with the payment of pensions that they owe. Perhaps they are interested in enterprises taken under the control of the Republics? Is this where the conversation starts?
Rodion Miroshnik : In this case, Ukraine is a self-sufficient party to the negotiations. They sign documents they are obligated to implement. They fail to implement them and radicalize their positions. They then propose revisiting the issues agreed upon as negotiating subjects. And then they present this as some kind of initiative, or as if someone were approaching them with an initiative.
That is, the Ukrainian side itself introduced an economic blockade, and introduced it two years after the Minsk agreements were signed. Ukraine itself has fenced itself off from the Republics. This was, of course, not part of the Minsk agreements. This is an absolute violation of the Minsk agreements by Ukraine. And now Ukraine says “let’s take it off now.”
Again, I must add that Poroshenko, as usual, is lying. He, whether he has or does not have the presidential chair, does not depend on whether he is lying or not. He always lies.
Valentin Filippov : Well, yes, of course.
Rodion Miroshnik : That's why he said that Russia had introduced a ruble zone in the Republics, seized their enterprises, and so on. Yes. But it was exactly the opposite. The Ukrainian side imposed a logistical blockade, blocking everything, including railway crossings. And then the Republics were forced not to seize or nationalize, but to take over the enterprises that the Ukrainian owners had essentially abandoned. Because we need functioning enterprises. We need, first and foremost, taxes, which should flow into the budget and make it possible to pay pensions, salaries, and ensure the existence of certain public organizations. Ukraine is doing everything to prevent us from having this opportunity. Therefore, we are not ready to put a noose around our own necks.
Therefore, since the Ukrainian side acted in this way, it received retaliatory actions. Today the Ukrainian side proposes to lift the economic blockade, we are ready to discuss this.
But when absolutely some fantastic assumptions are put forward about this, and they are not put forward at the negotiating table, they are put forward somewhere in the media, and they become overgrown with the fantasies of some Ukrainian experts, and simply turn into a generally indigestible product that we will not consume .
Valentin Filippov : You are now being asked to abandon the ruble zone and return…
Rodion Miroshnik: We weren't offered anything; we were asked to discuss lifting the economic blockade. That's all we need to say, because there's nothing more detailed to say...
Valentin Filippov : Who needs this more?
Rodion Miroshnik: You know, there's mutual interest here, although it's becoming less and less important for us. At first, of course, it was difficult for us to exist when Ukraine refused to buy coal and metal and to cooperate with a number of large industrial enterprises located on our territory. But gradually, we're turning the economy in the opposite direction, refusing to supply Ukraine, which Ukraine itself did.
And Ukraine, instead of paying 50 dollars for coal, I’m talking approximately in very figures, it prefers to buy it for 130 dollars. But Poroshenko and a number of comrades from his company very actively spent this amount, taking it out of the pockets of Ukrainians.
If Ukraine is satisfied with this, Poroshenko, of course, was satisfied with this, but whether those who paid ten times the utility bill were satisfied with this is the second question.
Are they willing to continue doing this? Well, this is more of a question for Ukraine.
Of course, on our part, we are interested in clear economic functioning and in the restoration of the economy of our territories, because we want to ensure our decent life. But under what conditions and how exactly these mechanisms should work – this needs to be discussed.
This is a very serious issue that should be conducted as a dialogue and, most likely, behind closed doors until a draft decision is adopted. And when the draft decision is adopted, it should already be consolidated by the parties and discussed in some public sphere.
In the meantime, we have seen that any initiative that was not even discussed in Minsk was immediately spat upon, and immediately Zelensky was told “ah-ah-ah,” and he could not defend his representative, and began to justify himself on his own, why a strong leader would hardly do this.
Valentin Filippov : I'm very concerned about the Donbas Reintegration Law. Is there any point in continuing negotiations while this law is in effect?
Rodion Miroshnik: Valentin, the points you've made can be broken down into several parts. First, is it possible to interrupt the Minsk negotiations? Absolutely. Slamming the door is probably the least intellectually demanding thing one could do in Minsk. But there's no other internationally recognized platform where the interests of the DPR and LPR are represented.
Valentin Filippov : No, no, no. Anyone can slam a door. You can chew paper and spit through a straw.
Rodion Miroshnik: Yes, the Ukrainian side often behaves like that. The Ukrainian side views the Minsk agreements as a yoke around its neck, because they would like an act of unconditional surrender. We, in general, do the same. Only in the opposite direction. We would like to speak in a completely different tone with the Ukrainian side, which truly must be held accountable for its crimes, but now we need to agree on coexistence. Therefore, we need to fulfill the international obligations we previously reached. At least, we are talking about initial actions.
Today, when Ukraine has completely changed the basis on which the Minsk agreements were concluded, it is extremely problematic to talk about their full implementation.
The Minsk agreements were signed with a state that was non-bloc, with a state in which the OUN/UPA were considered criminals, with a state in which the Kivalov/Kolesnichenko law on regulatory language policy existed, and further down the list.
There weren't all kinds of reintegration laws and things like that. The Ukrainian side unilaterally adopted so many legislative acts and other nonsense documentation that was thrown in our direction, and an attempt was made to ruin the existing negotiations.
This is Ukraine’s initiative, these are their unilateral actions. Thank God, the jurisdiction of the laws of Ukraine does not extend to either the LPR or the DPR. No matter how Ukraine strives for this.
Therefore, naturally, when negotiations are underway, when the question of whether it is possible to hold elections on the territory of Donetsk and Lugansk is discussed, we say, “Sorry, gentlemen. While you have a law on reintegration, which, in essence, introduces a similar regime with the Republic of Crimea, according to Ukrainian legislation, then, of course, it is impossible.” Therefore, you did everything yourself so that we simply could not do this.
Therefore, let's focus on the issues of ceasefire, disengagement of forces and equipment, and further look for options for agreements on further coexistence.
You know, we don’t have the ancient Sumerians or the great Ukrainians who would have dug between us the prototype of the Black Sea, or better yet, the Atlantic Ocean. We are doomed to live side by side.
Valentin Filippov : We still have a small disagreement on where exactly this sea should be dug.
Rodion Miroshnik: These issues exist, but now we're talking about the negotiation process and the basic documents that exist today and are supported by the aforementioned UN Security Council resolution. And the vast majority of them are not beneficial to Ukraine. Ukraine is obligated to cease military action, withdraw its weapons, and then negotiate some kind of political settlement. But Ukraine has created a huge number of problems today, which, by and large, puts an end to the possibility of reintegration. And this is thanks to the Ukrainian side.
Valentin Filippov : I really liked the optimistic ending, where we're putting an end to reintegration, and Ukraine has put it there. Welcome to the Russian Federation.
Rodion Miroshnik: Valentin, there are large, global processes that we, from the Republics’ point of view, do not…
Everyone knows our moods. Everyone knows the dominance of the interests and opinions of the people who live in this territory, which they proved not just with one rally, but with five years of confrontation. And therefore it is extremely difficult to accuse us of not being patriotic in our position.
But negotiators are obliged to conduct a dialogue in a certain corridor, and we will conduct this dialogue, because we believe that it is better to talk and agree than to kill each other.
But Ukraine still adheres to a different point of view. While Kuchma was proposing a ceasefire, the Ukrainian Armed Forces, in the format of this joint forces operation, were actively ironing out the Gorlovka, Mariupol, and Donetsk directions.
In the area of Pervomaisk and Zolote, shelling there has intensified 4-5 times. Therefore, whether it is worth reacting so strongly to the changed rhetoric is still a big question.
Because the statistics of shelling and the people who come under these shelling are much more eloquent proof of Ukraine’s reluctance to achieve peace, especially through political and diplomatic means.
But we still retain the need or possibility of negotiations and really hope that the changing palette in Kyiv itself or in Ukraine itself will have a positive impact on the possibility of an agreement on some kind of coexistence.
Therefore, you can always slam the door, but this is not the best way, and perhaps this is precisely the action Ukraine is waiting for us to accuse in front of the whole world.
Valentin Filippov : I agree. It's time to slam the door if there's someone to stick their head in. Good. Thank you very much. Ukraine won't wait.
Rodion Miroshnik: Thank you.
English version :: Read in English "Slam the door and abort the Minsk talks? No problem!"